Like many folks I'm trying to figure out why McCain chose Palin as his running mate after talking about Obama's lack of experience. Of course, he can argue that Palin has executive experience as a business owner, mayor and governor, while Obama has only legislative experience.
But he must know that a lot of voters will not share that assessment, so he must know that his choice could sink his campaign just when he seemed to be bucking the Democratic tide. So, why choose her?
If Palin **agrees with McCain on issues as much as many observers say, it seems to me he could be trying to redirect the GOP in the direction he wants by grooming Palin for 2012 even if his own chance to be President gets swept away by the Democratic tide. One election's VP candidate is frequently a major contender for the top spot in the next election. If McCain loses' and Palin is as brilliant a speaker and as quick a learner as many think, she would be hard to beat among the 2012 GOP field of candidates after another 4 years of experience as a Governor. McCain's position in The Senate (or as President if he is elected) will allow him to send Palin on foreign affairs assignments such as fact finding missions. That would improve her resume in the area where she is currently weakest.
McCain could be securing his Presidential legacy even if he doesn't become President.
** In anticipation of comments that he and she disagree on drilling in The Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge: Their disagreement on ANWR drilling seems insignificant to me. The Democratic Congress will block drilling in the short run, while offshore drilling, which Democrats are starting to consider, and development of alternative energy sources will make ANWR drilling less important in the long run.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
Protesting Misogyny with a McKinney'08-Clinton'12 Campaign?
I don't totally understand the anger some Clinton supporters feel regarding her treatment by the Democratic Party or the press. But I do feel that no one should be treated like a second class citizen regardless or race, sexual orientation, stage of the life cycle, or gender. So can any of you Clinton supporters explain incidents where Clinton or women in general were made to feel second class in the Democratic Primaries? And what is the best way to stop misogyny and help Clinton?
If you feel you must cast a protest vote to convince The Democratic Party to treat Clinton and women better, is McCain the best candidate to vote for as many in The PUMA movement seem to think? Voting "McCain" will do most to clear the path for a Clinton run in 2012, but will you feel guilty if McCain is blamed for all the problems we face in a couple years?
Is a McCain vote likely to be seen as a protest against Misogyny?
Would a vote for former Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney be more likely to be seen as a vote to protest misogyny since she also was denied The Democratic Nomination (for re election to Congress) after she slapped a DC policeman? If a male congressman got into a mild physical confrontation with a police officer, would he also be unacceptable to The Party or would he considered "gutsy"? Like Clinton, McKinney has more experience in Congress than Obama, and since she is Black you can't be accused of racism by voting for her.
What do you think?
If you feel you must cast a protest vote to convince The Democratic Party to treat Clinton and women better, is McCain the best candidate to vote for as many in The PUMA movement seem to think? Voting "McCain" will do most to clear the path for a Clinton run in 2012, but will you feel guilty if McCain is blamed for all the problems we face in a couple years?
Is a McCain vote likely to be seen as a protest against Misogyny?
Would a vote for former Democratic Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney be more likely to be seen as a vote to protest misogyny since she also was denied The Democratic Nomination (for re election to Congress) after she slapped a DC policeman? If a male congressman got into a mild physical confrontation with a police officer, would he also be unacceptable to The Party or would he considered "gutsy"? Like Clinton, McKinney has more experience in Congress than Obama, and since she is Black you can't be accused of racism by voting for her.
What do you think?
Any Suggestions for Joe Schirner from Consistent Ethic Folks?
Must be frustrating for supporters of The Consistent Ethic to find a candidate who is opposed to both abortion and the death penalty, but who doesn't do what it takes to win The Presidency or any other office.
Joe Schriner has done a lot of good work for the last few national election cycles, but minimizes his chances of getting anywhere by minimizing his image and resume. His theme is "Elect an 'Average Joe' ...Imagine That," as if average folks were never before elected President. That's just silly; Reagan, Nixon, Clinton, and others from the recently past century started out as average joes and were elected President.
So, if you are a Consistent Ethic supporter, what would you suggest to Joe Schriner?
I'd say "run for an office you can win and prepare yourself for next time. Also, start a national organization (other than a Presidential campaign committee) that addresses some big national issue or issues and prove you can inspire folks to work together toward a worthy goal. And lose the 'Average Joe' routine - Americans only want an average joe who has proven he or she can thrive in an environment and against challenges that are way way above average."
I also say "Good luck. We need concerned folks like you to be heard; but we need you to be serious first."
Joe Schriner has done a lot of good work for the last few national election cycles, but minimizes his chances of getting anywhere by minimizing his image and resume. His theme is "Elect an 'Average Joe' ...Imagine That," as if average folks were never before elected President. That's just silly; Reagan, Nixon, Clinton, and others from the recently past century started out as average joes and were elected President.
So, if you are a Consistent Ethic supporter, what would you suggest to Joe Schriner?
I'd say "run for an office you can win and prepare yourself for next time. Also, start a national organization (other than a Presidential campaign committee) that addresses some big national issue or issues and prove you can inspire folks to work together toward a worthy goal. And lose the 'Average Joe' routine - Americans only want an average joe who has proven he or she can thrive in an environment and against challenges that are way way above average."
I also say "Good luck. We need concerned folks like you to be heard; but we need you to be serious first."
Friday, July 18, 2008
Social Security Funded Vacations for Older Workers?
What are your thoughts on this?
We hear a lot about saving Social Security; and getting older workers to continue working and delay retirement is one of the ideas often offered. Working against this option, I think, is the downsizing of workforces and plant closings we have experienced in the past couple decades. When older workers who have several weeks of annual vacation time are forced to find new jobs that offer only a week or two of vacation many must find early retirement a more tempting option than it would be if they still had their vacation weeks each year.
Many older workers in new jobs had plans for the vacation weeks they lost - friends and family in different parts of the country they promised to visit or host for a week, trips they already scheduled and paid deposits on, a camper they bought in expectation of several weeks usage each year.
What do you think?
Would more older workers in new jobs continue working and paying into Social Security longer if they could afford to take, and were allowed to take, vacation weeks they had planned on?
On the other hand, would employers be less likely to hire older workers if they were required to give recently hired older workers more vacation time even if Social Security provided the additional vacation pay? Would younger workers demand an equal right of taking more time off, or would they be content that the future will offer them the same option if they have to change jobs?
Would such a plan seriously impact SSA operating expenses?
We hear a lot about saving Social Security; and getting older workers to continue working and delay retirement is one of the ideas often offered. Working against this option, I think, is the downsizing of workforces and plant closings we have experienced in the past couple decades. When older workers who have several weeks of annual vacation time are forced to find new jobs that offer only a week or two of vacation many must find early retirement a more tempting option than it would be if they still had their vacation weeks each year.
Many older workers in new jobs had plans for the vacation weeks they lost - friends and family in different parts of the country they promised to visit or host for a week, trips they already scheduled and paid deposits on, a camper they bought in expectation of several weeks usage each year.
What do you think?
Would more older workers in new jobs continue working and paying into Social Security longer if they could afford to take, and were allowed to take, vacation weeks they had planned on?
On the other hand, would employers be less likely to hire older workers if they were required to give recently hired older workers more vacation time even if Social Security provided the additional vacation pay? Would younger workers demand an equal right of taking more time off, or would they be content that the future will offer them the same option if they have to change jobs?
Would such a plan seriously impact SSA operating expenses?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)